of the northern territory judges of the supreme court of the northern territory are pleased to...

SUPREME COURTof the

NORTHERN TERRITORY Annual Report2012–2013

SUPREME COURTof the

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Annual Report2012–2013

Supreme Court of the Northern Territory2

Contents

3 Introduction

4 Year in review

Statistics

Work of the Court

8 Court Buildings

10 Profile of the Court

12 About the Court

Jurisdiction of the Court

The Registries

Library

PD6 of 2009 Report

18 Highlights

Farewell to Justice Mildren

Appointment of Justice Hiley

Interpreters’ Protocol

Self-Represented Litigants’ Kit

Court technology

Supreme Court Café

Upgrade of prisoners’ cells

Hearing fees

Timor Lesté visit

Annual Report2012–2013 3

The Judges of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory are pleased to present the Annual Report of the Court for the year 2012–2013. Although there is no obligation on the Court to provide an annual report, the Judges regard it as appropriate to produce such a report in order to provide the people of the Northern Territory with details as to the administration of justice in the Court.

The workload of the Court in 2012–2013 reflected the long-term trend of increasing criminal lodgments and a slight decrease in civil lodgments. It is pleasing to note that, with effective case management practices and with hard work on the part of the Judges and the staff of the Court, the work of the Court has continued to be carried out in a timely fashion without unacceptable delays.

During the year the composition of the court changed. Justice Dean Mildren retired as a Judge of the Court on 15 February 2013. Justice Graham Hiley was appointed to the Court on the 1 March 2013.

Introduction

The Honourable Chief Justice Trevor Riley


2012–2013 Statistics

Criminal Jurisdiction

Lodgments: 467

Court of Criminal Appeal: 29

Total Lodgments: 496

Finalised: 442

Finalised Court of Criminal Appeal: 15

Total Finalised: 459

Civil Jurisdiction

Lodgments: 138

Court of Appeal: 14

Appeals from Lower Court: 103

Probate: 238

Motor Accidents Compensation Appeals Tribunal: 3

Total Lodgments: 496

Finalised: 165

Court of Appeal: 14

Appeals from Lower Court: 119

Probate: 233

Motor Accidents Compensation Appeals Tribunal: 5

Total Finalised: 536

Year in Review


Work of the Court

With the exception of criminal lodgments in Alice Springs (discussed below), the work of the court in 2012–13 has been consistent with the long-term trends of an increasing criminal work load and a slowly decreasing civil workload.

The figures reveal that the increasing workload of the Court has been appropriately managed. These figures show that 90% of civil finalisations were within 12 months of lodgement and 95% of criminal finalisations were within 12 months of lodgement.

Civil

Civil lodgments in 2012–13 were below the average level over the last five years. This is consistent with the long-term decline in civil lodgments since 2003.

2010–11 2011–12

50

100

150

200

300

250

2009–102008–090

312

248

312 300259

3500

2012–13

Civil lodgements (excl probate) 2008–09 to 2012–13

2010–11 2011–12

50

100

150

200

300

250

2009–102008–090

328

264291 291 301

3500

2012–13

Civil finalisations (excl probate) 2008–09 to 2012–13


Criminal

Criminal lodgments in Darwin increased in 2012–13 over those of 2011–12. This is consistent with a long-term trend of increasing criminal lodgments.

There were fewer criminal finalisations in Darwin in 2012–13 than in 2011–12. However, the number of finalisations was consistent with long-term trends.

Surprisingly, in the 2012–13 year, criminal lodgments and finalisations in Alice Springs were below the average for the previous five years. At this time, it is unknown whether this is an anomaly, or whether it signifies a departure from the trend towards a steady increase in the criminal workload in Alice Springs that has occurred from 2007 to 2012.

The Court will continue to monitor the situation in Alice Springs and will endeavour to identify what, if anything, is the cause of the relatively low number of listings.

Year in Review

2010–11 2012–13

100

200

300

400

2009–102007–08 2008–090

Darwin Alice Springs

224

293247

295347

134 121165

141 120

337

173

2011–12

Criminal lodgements (excl appeals) 2007–08 to 2012–13

2010–11 2011–12

100

200

300

400

2009–102008–090

Darwin Alice Springs

261 280 281348 302

126 137 120

206140

2012–13

Criminal finalisations (excl appeals) 2007–08 to 2012–13


Sitting hours

Although there were marginally fewer court sitting hours in Darwin in 2012–13 as compared to 2011–12, the result is nonetheless consistent with long-term growth in sitting hours.

The lower figure reported for Alice Springs sitting hours reflects the unusually low number of criminal lodgements described above. It may also reflect a greater number of matters being resolved by way of plea, rather than proceeding to trial.

2587

500

1000

1500

2000

3000

2500

02010–11 2011–122009–102008–09

23882501 2488

2653

2012–13

Darwin sitting hours 2008–09 to 2012–13

200

400

600

800

02010–11 2011–122009–102008–09

630 658 688741

542

2012–13

Alice Springs sitting hours 2008–09 to 2012–13


Supreme Court - Darwin

The Supreme Court building in Darwin was officially opened in November 1991 when it was proclaimed that it ‘shall be surrendered and delivered to the Judges of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory for the purposes of the administration of justice in and for the Northern Territory of Australia’. The building celebrated its 20th birthday in November 2011.

The building has served the people of the Northern Territory and the judiciary well. In both the Northern Territory and around Australia it is known as a much admired court building. It is a building in which the community can take pride.

The Court has identified the need for a fifth courtroom in Darwin with jury facilities, in order to meet the increasing criminal case load. Approval has been obtained for commencement of the planning and design of the courtroom. Supreme Court - Darwin

Court Buildings


Alice Springs Law Courts

Alice Springs Court House

In Alice Springs, the Supreme Court shares the Alice Springs Law Courts building with the Magistrates’ Court. The building is antiquated and has only one jury court, with no capacity for adding another. As a consequence, it is not practically possible for the Supreme Court to conduct more than one trial at a time. As the criminal work of the Court in Central Australia increases, the prospect of greater delays in matters coming to trial, with unnecessary adverse consequences for complainants, witnesses and accused persons also increases.

There have been calls made over many years by successive Chief Justices for the problem to be addressed.

The Northern Territory Government has recognised that the premises are inadequate, and is actively pursuing options to improve the situation, for both the long-term and the immediate future.


The Court consists of the Chief Justice, other Judges and the Master. Prior to appointment, a Judge must have been admitted to practice in Australia for a period of not less than ten years or have been previously appointed as a Judge in an Australian Court. Provision is made for appointment of additional Judges and acting Judges, thus creating a pool of judicial officers who may be called upon as required.

Judges are appointed by the Administrator and hold office until they are aged 70. They may only be removed from office by the Administrator on an address from the Legislative Assembly on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.

The Master is also a member of the Court.The Master ceases to hold office at age 70 and may only be removed from office by the Administrator if the Master becomes incapable of performing his duties or is guilty of misbehaviour.

Members of the Court are not public servants.

Profile of the Court

Members of the Court 2012–13

Chief JusticeThe Honourable Trevor John Riley

JudgesThe Honourable Dean Mildren AM RFD (retired 15 February 2013)The Honourable Stephen Roger SouthwoodThe Honourable Judith Clair KellyThe Honourable Jenny May BloklandThe Honourable Peter Martin BarrThe Honourable Graham Eric Hiley RFD (appointed 1 March 2013)

Additional JudgesThe Honourable John Edward ReevesThe Honourable John Ronald Mansfield AOThe Honourable Brian Ross Martin AO

Acting JudgeThe Honourable Leslie Trevor Olsson AO MBE RFD EDThe Honourable Dean Mildren AM RFD (appointed 27 February 2013)

MasterMr Vincent Michael Luppino

RegistrarMs Margaret Rischbieth


Left to Right: Justice Dean Mildren, Justice John Reeves, Justice Jenny Blokland, Justice John Mansfield , Justice Stephen Southwood, Justice Judith Kelly, Justice Peter Barr, Justice Graham Hiley, Former Chief Justice Austin Asche, Chief Justice Trevor Riley and Former Justice David Angel.


Jurisdiction of the Court

Criminal trials

Except for certain minor indictable offences which may be dealt with summarily by the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, the Court has exclusive jurisdiction over all indictable offences under Territory and Commonwealth law. Criminal trials are heard before a Judge and a jury of twelve.

Civil cases

All civil cases are heard by a Judge alone, although there is a limited power, rarely used, for trial by a Judge and a jury of four.

Appeals from lower courts

Appeals lay from the lower courts to a single Judge of the Court. The nature of the appeal varies according to the terms of the statute creating the right of appeal.

Civil appeals from a single Judge of the Supreme Court are heard by not less than three Judges sitting as the Court of Appeal. Criminal appeals and references by the Attorney-General or by a trial Judge are heard by not less than three Judges sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal. The Court

sometimes sits as a Full Court, usually of not less than three Judges, to hear special cases referred to it by a single Judge. The Full Court also sits in matters involving the admission and discipline of legal practitioners.

Appeals from the Court of Appeal or the Court of Criminal Appeal are heard by the High Court of Australia, but only after that Court has granted special leave to appeal.

Federal jurisdiction

The Court has jurisdiction in most federal matters except where a federal court has exclusive jurisdiction. Sometimes the Commonwealth Act conferring jurisdiction on the Court provides for appeals from a single Judge of the Court to be heard exclusively by a Full Bench of a particular Commonwealth Court, e.g. the Federal Court of Australia, but usually appeals are heard either by the Northern Territory Court of Appeal or Court of Criminal Appeal.

About the Court


Case flow management

Order 48 of the Supreme Court Rules provides for all civil matters to be managed by the Court. Cases are divided into categories, depending upon complexity, the likely length of the trial and urgency. Long or complex trials are allocated to a particular Judge who deals with all interlocutory matters at directions hearings. Usually that Judge also conducts the trial. A system of case management in criminal matters is also in place. The object of case flow management is to give the members of the Court greater control of the efficient progress of cases to trial.

Other Matters

Other matters preliminary to or consequent upon a trial are dealt with either by a Judge or the Master, as the case may be, usually in open court, either upon a summons or interlocutory summons.

The Registries

Civil Registry

The Registrar of the Supreme Court is Margaret Rischbieth. The Registrar is the Registrar of Probates, Registrar of the Land and Valuation Review Tribunal, Registrar of the Motor Accidents (Compensation) Appeals Tribunal, Secretary of the Legal Practitioners Admission Board and Registrar of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal.

The Registrar is also a Criminal Registrar. This appointment extends the Registrar’s case management duties to cover the criminal jurisdiction as well as the civil. The Supreme Court Rules provide for pre-trial conferences to be held in each matter, and the issues to be canvassed at the conferences are set out in detail in the Rules.

The Registrar’s main function is the case management of civil jurisdiction files. In that capacity the Registrar calls parties in for directions hearings and listing hearings and makes orders to ensure that practitioners are complying with the Rules. This case management is shared with the Master and covers all current civil files, with the exception of those categorised for the attention of a Judge. The Registrar also conducts callovers of matters requiring listing dates and taxes bills of costs.


The Sheriff ’s main areas of responsibility are:

• Administering the jury system

• The custody and escort of prisoners within the Supreme Court building in Darwin

• The provision of court orderly services for the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

• The management of the Supreme Court Criminal and Court of Criminal Appeal registries

The Supreme Court Library

The library provides a comprehensive reference and information service to the Judges and Magistrates of the Northern Territory and to the legal profession in the Northern Territory. Persons representing themselves in Court can apply for access to the library for reference purposes. On application, other persons may be granted access to use the library for reference only.

The collection is a reference collection with some textbooks and bound law reports able to be borrowed to take to Court. There are two main collections held in the Supreme Court buildings in Darwin and Alice Springs; smaller collections in each of the Judge’s chambers in Darwin, the visiting Judge’s

The Registrar and the Registry support and assist the judiciary in its role of providing justice to the community and in providing an efficient and effective registry and information service to practitioners and members of the public.

The Registry staff process all documents filed in the civil and related jurisdictions and the Courts of Appeal; receipt, keep in safe custody and return subpoenaed items and exhibits in those jurisdictions; provide procedural assistance to the public and the legal profession; assist personal applicants with appeals and probate matters; perform functions in liaison with Court Recording Services; and track, maintain and archive files in those jurisdictions.

Sheriff’s Office

As an officer of the Supreme Court the Sheriff performs administrative functions under a variety of acts including the Supreme Court Act 1988 (NT), Juries Act 1980 (NT) and Court Security Act 1998 (NT). The Sheriff is also Marshal in Admiralty which means the office is also responsible for the execution of arrest warrants and custody of vessels under the Admiralty Act 1988 (Cth).

The Sheriff is appointed as Criminal Registrar under the Rules of the Supreme Court. The Current Sheriff is Peter Wilson.

About the Court


chambers in Alice Springs and in the Magistrates Courts in Darwin are also maintained.

The library has in excess of 80,000 volumes, and is the largest law collection in the Northern Territory. There are extensive series of law reports from all Australian jurisdictions, as well as some from other countries. There is a large collection of statutory material, textbooks and legal journals in addition to significant digital holdings.

Access to several commercial databases on the Internet is made available to the Judges and Magistrates in their chambers and other library users from PCs in the 2 main libraries.

If a textbook or article is not held by the library, arrangements can be made to obtain it on interlibrary loan; this service is only available to Judges, Magistrates and legal practitioners.

A Current Awareness Bulletin and an Email Bulletin are issued by the library. The former contains a copy of the contents pages of the journals received in the previous month; the latter contains new textbooks and references to articles in journals received by the library arranged in subject order as well as details of recent Northern Territory legislative changes and judgments handed down by Northern Territory courts.

Supreme Court Library - Darwin


Practice Direction 6 of 2009 — Report

Trial Civil Procedure Reforms (“PD6”) introduced a pre-action protocol procedure which applies to most civil actions commenced in the Court from 1 January 2010.

As reported in the last annual report, the objects of the PD6 protocols are to facilitate the resolution of disputes at an early stage by requiring parties to exchange comprehensive information in respect of a claim or a defence prior to the commencement of proceedings. The protocols also require parties to attempt some form of alternative dispute resolution.

The effect of the introduction of the protocols was that many cases settled early, some before proceedings issued but mostly before the expense of

Master Vince Luppino

preparation for trial was incurred. The net effect of this was considerable savings in Court resources and considerable savings in costs for parties.

This trend has continued throughout the period covered by this report. The protocols continue to be a success in their operation and also in terms of the timely and efficient management of the contentious civil work of the Court.

To build on that success, the Court decided to establish a Committee to review the operation of PD6 with the specific directive to consider whether it was appropriate to incorporate the protocols into the Supreme Court Rules.

The Committee comprised Justice Kelly and Master Luppino from the Court, Mr Alistair Wyvill SC from the independent Bar and litigation solicitors Ms Cathy Spurr and Ms Peggy Cheong.

During the course of the Committee’s deliberations Professor Tania Sourdin from the Australian Centre for Justice Innovation, an arm of Monash University, visited Darwin to examine the operation of PD6 as part of her research into pre-action protocols. In the course of that research Professor Sourdin conducted a number of focus groups in Darwin. Her report commented favourably on the operation and the effectiveness of PD6.

About the Court


Following completion of its deliberations the Committee recommended a number of changes to the protocols. These changes were designed to address some minor issues which became apparent after the commencement of the protocols and to generally improve the operation of PD6. The Committee also recommended that the protocols be incorporated into the Supreme Court Rules.

The Committee’s report was considered by the Judges who then resolved to accept the report in its entirety and in particular the recommendation that the protocols be incorporated into the Supreme Court Rules.

Presently the matter awaits preparation of instructions to Parliamentary Counsel to draft the appropriate amendments to the Rules.

Court Associates (left to right): Matthew Littlejohn, Catherine Voumard, Peter Clayton, Isabella Maxwell-Williams, Bridget McDermott and Thomas Bland.


Farewell to Justice Mildren

The Honourable Justice Dean Mildren AM RFD retired as a Judge of the Court on 15 February 2013.

Justice Mildren was the longest-serving Judge in the Court’s history, having been appointed in 1991. He came to the Northern Territory from South Australia in 1972 and established the firm which later became known as Mildren & Partners. He practised as a barrister and solicitor until joining the independent Bar in 1980. He was appointed Queen’s Counsel in 1983.

Justice Mildren held several prominent appointments before his elevation to the Bench. He was President of the Northern Territory Law Society; Chairman of the Northern Territory Planning Appeals Committee; Deputy Chairman of the Northern Territory Legal Practitioners Complaints

Committee; and President of the Northern Territory Bar Association, for which he was honoured with life membership. He was also Vice President of the Australian Bar Association.

While a member of the Court, Justice Mildren was Chairman of Northern Territory Council of Law Reporting and President of the Northern Territory Law Reform Committee. He is a Life Member of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association of the Northern Territory and a member of the Australian Centre of International Arbitration.

Justice Mildren was extensively involved in the Australian Army Legal Corps (Reserve), in which he attained the rank of Colonel. He was awarded the Reserve Force Decoration and Bar in 1995.

Justice Mildren also made distinguished contributions to legal education. He was an Adjunct Professor of Law at Charles Darwin University and was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by the University in 2013. In addition to writing several scholarly articles on law, Justice Mildren is the author of Big Boss Fella All Same Judge, a history of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory.

Justice Mildren was sworn in as an Acting Judge on 27 February 2013. On 10 June 2013, he was admitted as a Member of the General Division of the Order of Australia.

Highlights

The Honourable Justice Dean Mildren


Supreme Court - Justice Dean Mildren’s Ceremonial Farewell


Appointment of Justice Hiley

The Honourable Justice Graham Hiley RFD was appointed as a Judge of the Court on 1 March 2013.

Justice Hiley’s appointment marked his return to the Territory, having practised at the Queensland Bar since 1994. Before moving to Queensland, Justice Hiley had a distinguished legal career in the Territory. He was appointed as a Queen’s Counsel in the Northern Territory in 1983 and in Victoria and Queensland in 1993. He was a founding member of the Northern Territory Bar Association and Member of that Association from 1978–93.

Justice Hiley was President of the NT Bar Association from 1990–1993, President of the NT Law Society from 1987–88 and Vice President from 1986–87.

He has held numerous other appointments in the NT, including Deputy Chair of the Lands Acquisition Tribunal (1983–95), Chair of the Planning Appeals Committee (1984–94) Lecturer at the then Northern Territory University (1985–93), Member of the Legal Practitioners’ Complaints Committee (1990–93) and Chair of the Community Living Areas Tribunal (1990–98).

Highlights

The Honourable Chief Justice Trevor Riley (front) and The Honourable Justice Graham Hiley (behind)


Members of the Profession at Justice Hiley’s Ceremonial Welcome


HighlightsInterpreters’ Protocol

Following the successful Language and the Law Conference in May 2012, the Interpreters’ Protocol was developed, taking effect in June 2013. The Protocol was developed by Justice Blokland, in conjunction with the Aboriginal Interpreters Service, the Interpreting Translator Service, legal aid agencies, the Criminal Lawyers Association (NT) and representatives of the legal profession.

The Protocol provides guidance to the Court, interpreters and legal practitioners regarding the engagement of interpreters, the professional duties of interpreters, and the role of interpreters in Court. It is available on the Supreme Court website at http://www.supremecourt.nt.gov.au/media/documents/InterpreterProtocols.pdf.

Self-Represented Litigants’ Kit

The Court has developed a Self-Represented Litigants’ Guide for unrepresented criminal defendants. It is the criminal equivalent to the Self-Represented Civil Litigants’ Handbook, which was published in February 2012.

The Guide provides assistance to criminal defendants who are to appear in the Court by describing and explaining the procedural steps that may occur in the lead-up to a trial or plea hearing, and the procedures during the hearing itself.

The Guide is available for download at the Supreme Court Website: http://www.supremecourt.nt.gov.au/going2court/documents/Self_Represented_Ciminal_guide.pdf

Court technology

The new videoconferencing and recording equipment installed in 2012 in Courts 2, 5 and 6 in Darwin and Court 1 in Alice Springs has been used extensively during 2012–13. While the equipment represents a welcome advancement in the capabilities of the Court to communicate with parties and witnesses in remote locations, there have been some technical problems that have caused difficulties in hearings. The Court is working with the contractors responsible for installing and maintaining the equipment to resolve these issues.

Upgrade of prisoners’ cells

A review in early 2012 identified some areas of the prisoners’ cells in the Darwin Supreme Court building that required upgrading. These have been addressed. In particular, aspects of the cells that could potentially have been used by prisoners to commit acts of self-harm have been remedied.


Hearing fees

Regulations were passed, commencing 1 July 2013, which dramatically increased the filing fees payable by civil litigants in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, and introduced a daily hearing fee. The Court will monitor any possible adverse effects on access to justice that the fees may cause.

Law Week activities

As part of Law week, the Supreme Court held a number of events in both Darwin and Alice Springs.

In Alice Springs, Justice Blokland hosted a Sentencing Forum, providing the people of Alice Springs with the opportunity to discuss how sentencing decisions are made.

Justice Barr was interviewed on radio to discuss the objectives and challenges Judges face when sentencing people.

Educational visits from local schools were held in both Darwin and Alice Springs. These visits included: a mock trial; a visit to a jury room and a court in session; and a discussion with a judicial officer.

Justice Southwood and Jack Karczewski QC (Director of Public Prosecutions) addressed over seventy senior students on their career experiences within the law. This ‘Cabinet to Law’ program also included speakers from Parliament House.

Supreme Court Café

The Supreme Court Café has resumed operations, and is now known as ‘Bigwigs’. Bigwigs serves a variety of meals and beverages made on the premises.


Timor Lesté visit

In 2012, members of the Court visited Dili, where they were hosted by the Courts of Timor-Lesté. The Judges of both Courts held a series of very productive meetings in which matters of mutual benefit were discussed.

In particular, the Judges discussed the development of the justice system in Timor-Lesté and issues surrounding respect for the rule of law in an emerging democracy. Further, the Judges discussed the challenges both jurisdictions share in delivering justice to remote locations, and across cultural and linguistic groups.

The Judges of the Northern Territory Supreme Court look forward to continuing the close and fruitful relationship with the Judges of the Timor-Lesté Courts. It is hoped that the Northern Territory Supreme Court will be able to host the Timor-Lesté Judges again in the near future.

Later in 2012, at the invitation of Chief Justice Claudio Ximines, Chief Justice Riley was invited to Dili to address the IX Conference of Chief Justices of the Supreme Courts of Portuguese Speaking Countries and Territories. There were nine such countries and territories represented at the conference and the Chief Justice of Singapore was also a guest. Chief Justice Riley spoke on safeguarding judicial independence.

Chief Justice Claudio Ximines and Chief Justice Trevor Riley

of the northern territory judges of the supreme court of the northern territory are pleased to...

Documents